As far as fast-moving political unrest goes, we're certainly seeing a bit more than usual at the moment. There's always some measure of unrest around the world, but a wide swathe of large-scale protests and revolts isn't quite the usual. It is certianly getting a lot of publicity, but there's a good bit going on, so...

Advertisement

Frankly, I'm less concerned with what is going on in Libya than I am with what is happening in the other Arab states. Perhaps I just don't really see rebellion in Libya as nearly as much of a threat to my own personal well being than say, unrest in the entire Middle East. It has always been a comfort to me that the Arab Nations preferred fighting amongst themselves to world domination. Who knows what can happen when they all become united? The results of these protests may be more world changing than the protests themselves.

I especially think the situation in Afghanistan is a mess. Teleban does not seem weaker than it was five years, and I don't see any realistic plan to reduce their influence, on the contrary they seem to gain influence politically.

What happens in Libya is part of the most important event since the fall of the communism in 1989. A ot of countries have brutal dictators, who might keep the islamists down, but are parias, which the western world should not be associated with in any way. The tunisian and the egyptian fell pretty easily, but if Ghadaffis regime ends, it will signal that even a dictator who violently cling to the power, can be removed. So if the revolution in Libya happens, it's just a question of when the next revolution will happen. But I doubt the arab natons and world domination will frequently be mentioned in the same sentence anytime soon, since none of the countries have achieved anything significantly in the last century, they just aren't powerful.The important unknown thing, is what regimes will take over from the dictators: there is the fear, that the islamists will take over, but at least in the north african countries I don't think they will, since the inhabitants here seems relatively welleducated and modern.

France has just started patrolling the airspace, which is good to see, since it's a good signal that Europe can fight their own battles (ideally I had seen Egyptian airplanes). Hopefully this will change the war.

I'm Currently working on the Mod [url=http://www.fliggerty.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=1659]The dwemer society[/url]

it appears the U.N.(at least France and I think Italy) has made a decision they are supporting the rebels...Gadhafi thought he'd take advantage of the U.N.'s long decision time to ignore the cease fire and attack one of the Rebel's strongholds.

so I guess we'll see how this plays out now the U.N. is trying to keep the cease fire and no fly zone... but how long it'll last now? no one can be sure...

It was our first real naval victory after winning independence, and is still sung about.

It's also an interesting reminder that the traditional Muslim view in that part of the world regarding the rest of the world really hasn't changed that much - and in fact, a similar pirate operation is now operating off another coast of Africa. It will be interesting to see if history repeats itself.

After the UN decided air strikes were ok (which I guess nobody expected or something?), there were quite a few negative comments. Gaddafi and his state TV have been coming up with the most random things, not even bothering to disguise them as truth. Then Gaddafi decided it'd be smart to threaten to attack civilian planes and ships (and he doesn't want the west to come crashing down on him?).

Anyway, the Taliban picked up Gaddafi's nonsense and were relaying that, then Russia (Putin, at least) started doing the same, calling it a crusade and all sorts of nonsense. Rumor has it Gaddafi offered Russia oil deals in exchange for condemning the no-fly zone. Then the Russian president condemned Putin's remarks...

Hopefully the UN meeting today won't call it off, because it looks like it's actually helping the rebels a bit, but it's certainly become a pretty mess. The sooner Gaddafi et al are gone, the better.

Edit: Oh, and just to show it's not about the oil (except for Putin), there's talk of an oil embargo against Libya until this is sorted out.

ArchonofFate wrote:@Morovir that's the war I was thinking of.... for the life of me I couldn't remember the name of it

Guess I was wrong. Sorry morovir.

peachykeen wrote:. . . there's talk of an oil embargo against Libya until this is sorted out.

Ah, how history does love to repeat itself. It's going to be so much fun watching the weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth from those who were too young (or weren't even born) to remember the last oil embargo. It wouldn't matter if a country only exported one barrel a year; when the word "embargo" is used, you can expect gasoline prices to at least double. Hope there isn't another record heat wave . . .

It reminds me all so much of the fall of the Shah of Iran. (I was 17 at the time). When dictators fall, the replacement so often seems worse. What does disturb me is the way equally brutal regimes are getting a free hand in the middle east ATM. I'll be overjoyed if my gut feeling that 'it will all end in tears' is wrong this time.

symon wrote:It reminds me all so much of the fall of the Shah of Iran. (I was 17 at the time). When dictators fall, the replacement so often seems worse. What does disturb me is the way equally brutal regimes are getting a free hand in the middle east ATM. I'll be overjoyed if my gut feeling that 'it will all end in tears' is wrong this time.

One thing that really surprises me, was that the arab league went out an suspended Libya and demanded a no-fly zone. Since most members of the arab league are ruled by dictators, who should realise, that the next revolution could very well be in their country, I would have expected them to say, this is an internal Libyan problem, which the rest of the world should not interfere with, so they could expect the world to do the same, if they use force against the opposition.

What keeps annoy me in this conflict is that anybody is listening to anything Ghadaffi or his people says. From the conflict started, I haven't heard a single true word spoken, and still people care about, what he says. He is lying about everything, so why do people keep confusing themselves by listening to him.

Every unstability in a major oilproducing country will affect the prices, so they should rise as long as the Libyan oilproduction is impacted. But maybe USA should see it as another reason to reduce their dependency on oil.

I'm Currently working on the Mod [url=http://www.fliggerty.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=1659]The dwemer society[/url]

That didn't surprise me actually. Ghadaffi is very disliked by some of them, (Too secular for one thing, though he's been known to pay lip service.) and with all eyes focussed on Libya, they get a free hand. If you dig and read reports on what is happening elsewhere in the middle east, you can find out what they are doing with that free hand. That said, there has been quite a bit of rowing back by the Arab league. I think they wanted condemnation, sanctions, etc. but NOT actual action. Bombs dropping on Arab citizens (even stories of same is bad enough) makes them look like allies of the 'Crusader West'. Iraq burned our 'benefit of the doubt' capital and made sure actions such as this become fraught with missteps.

symon wrote:That didn't surprise me actually. Ghadaffi is very disliked by some of them, (Too secular for one thing, though he's been known to pay lip service.) and with all eyes focussed on Libya, they get a free hand. If you dig and read reports on what is happening elsewhere in the middle east, you can find out what they are doing with that free hand.

Ah, well... the arab league leaders - or at least some of them - decided not because they wanted free hand. Supporting this is quite a disservice to their own situation. Why? Well, some if not most of these regimes are in big trouble right now (e.g. Syria, Bahrain, Jemen), others (Algeria, Jordania, even Saudi Arabia) might follow. And then we have Tunisia and Egypt, where people already got rid of their unloved regimes. So the league could and will not speak with one voice for some (Syria, Algeria) were against military involvement of a third party in Lybia at all while others fully agree to it. Yet public opinion in most arab states is against the "lean back and let lybian regime/rebels do their thing" position since this would end in a massacre. That given certain arab regimes face a no-win-situation.

If they voted against intervention, the UN/western countries would not have acted and the result might have been a second Rwanda in Lybia. This could easily cause public opinion in arab countries to turn against their autocratic leaders resulting in massive civil unrest and if we look at the stability of various countries... well, guess what happens. Yet if they support the UN resolution it might calm down their people for a while. But if the Lybian regime falls (I strongly believe it will, the question is how long it takes) this could encourage and strengthen the opposition in other states as well.

zarnatheron wrote:Every unstability in a major oilproducing country will affect the prices, so they should rise as long as the Libyan oilproduction is impacted. But maybe USA should see it as another reason to reduce their dependency on oil.

That could be true, however the demand for oil has also dropped with the mass destruction of newly-made cars in Japan, so depending on how much supply and demand have dropped relative to each other we could either see a rise or drop in oil prices.